Proposed Super Homestead Exemption Information

[TooFarTampa]

You speak of the boat which I'm afloat. Even though property values are down significantly for 07 I am being accessed at the 06 values with no consideration to the current market.

Your taxes are based on the Jan. 1, 2007 value. If you can provide evidence that your home was worth less than the assessed value on 01/01/07, then you still have a small window of time to appeal the assessment. Days? A week? anyone know?

BTW, I did not mean to minimize the pain being felt by some SoWallers. But in other parts of the state, the imbalance between the tax bills of recent buyers and longtime homesteaders is proportionally even higher than (for example) the difference between what ShallowsNole or SHELLY may be paying and what Curtis may be paying. Millage rates make a difference too.

 

[TooFarTampa]

Also, anyone notice that the default setting on these calculators for yearly projected increase in property value is about 7 percent? That's for almost every county's Super Homestead Calculator. If you changed it to, say, more like 4-5 percent, over a 20 year period you'd have a much different result. Given the major correcting that is still ongoing, 4-5 percent over the next 20 MAY be more realistic.

Another thing to consider though is that under the Super Exemption, county appraisers would still have too much wiggle room in what they could assess a property for. At present most counties follow the unwritten rule of appraising values at about 80 percent of market value. But that is no where in the law as far as I know. If Super Exemption did pass, what is to stop appraisers from adjusting to using true "market value" numbers so that governments could continue to rake it in?

Think your appraiser is going to be honest? Most of them probably are, but there is the case of Jim Smith in Pinellas County, who is in a ton of hot water now for ethical violations that are clearly a big, big problem.

So the SOH sucks. The Super Exemption sucks. What the heck should we do now? SHELLY is right; I see only backpedaling, not leadership, from good old Charlie.

 

[Curtis]

Your taxes are based on the Jan. 1, 2007 value. If you can provide evidence that your home was worth less than the assessed value on 01/01/07, then you still have a small window of time to appeal the assessment. Days? A week? anyone know?

I believe the appeal date Sept 4. You have to pay a 15.00 fee to the clerk of the courts and fill out paper work for your evaluation.

My understanding after talking with the property appraiser is that 07 taxes are based on 06 values. I was told that for instance, that if values are down for 07 then it would be reflected on my 08 assessment.

 

[TooFarTampa]

I believe the appeal date Sept 4. You have to pay a 15.00 fee to the clerk of the courts and fill out paper work for your evaluation.

My understanding after talking with the property appraiser is that 07 taxes are based on 06 values. I was told that for instance, that if values are down for 07 then it would be reflected on my 08 assessment.

If you think the number they assessed you for is accurate for all of '06, then there's not much you can do. The county is following state law.

 

[Bob]

This is a major problem. It is my opinion that if you live or own in unincorporated Walton County, for the most part you are in pretty good shape.

The metropolitan, incorporated areas have a completely different tax structure where millage rates are often more than double. People who have purchased in the past five years in, say, the cities of Tampa or St. Pete or other small cities nearby are routinely paying $8-10,000 in taxes on a $350-450,000 homesteaded home. Now six or seven years ago if you paid that much you would get something special. Not so much anymore, especially as the competition to get into top school districts has increased and what people could "afford" to pay got higher as the rates went down and lending standards all but disappeared.

I'm assuming Bob in Orlando has seen similar changes. In many cases it's not so much a "land grab" as, "let's chase after the best neighborhoods." Over time everything else went up too. My mom's average little 50s ranch in a very average, marginally desirable neighborhood is now valued at $250,000. Without her SOH cap she would be paying $5,000 a year! Instead it's just over $1,000. My husband and I considered purchasing his mom's house a few years ago to help her out financially. The tax ramifications of the changed ownership nixed that idea right away.

So SOH is clearly flawed. The people who have bought in the past several years have gotten screwed from a tax standpoint. Young families, downsizers and everyone who does not homestead is affected: landlords who have long rented our their single family homes, longtime snowbirds (who would have a hard time selling their places now that the taxes have shot up) and yes, investors, speculators, etc.

I think the problem during the boom was more a lack of collective wisdom in our federal government, in the lending industry and among city, county and state governments, who happily took all the new money and didn't care how this would affect people.

I would love for my taxes to go down, but I also knew going in exactly how much they were going to cost me. Now, I don't feel too terribly sorry for people who didn't make the same calculations I did. What I can't understand is why the "Super Homestead" once again requires individual homeowners to make a decision, rather than truly holding the governments accountable for all the money they raked in!

SOH is an absolute joke, and all we get out of this is a vote on a "Super Homestead fix", with no real emphasis on where the problems lie.

So I ask, SHELLY, if you like your comfy SOH cap, great, who can blame you? But why is it good for the state as a whole? What is the solution, aside from going back in time?

Same dynamic here. We bought in '92. Added a bed and bath in '00, and my taxes doubled. The joke is I'm still paying less than one third the taxes of some of my neighbors. I see the only answer as elimination of property taxes for seniors, and the extermination of SOH. It's very bad law.

 

[Smiling JOe]

It is not a theory. Revenues are limited by statute. So that must be taken into account. Revenues are limited to inflation plus new construction. This is going to force the millage rates down.

...and that is why the County Commissioners continue to allow changes in increased densities for zoning in WalCo, even though one of their three words in the County Seal is "Conservation" -- $$$ in the County Coffers.

While the County revenues may have limits, it doesn't mean that we should be maxing out the limits, or that we should continue to create new construction for the sole purpose of lining pockets, developers' and the County's, with cash. How about they show a little restraint with the spending? Has anyone noticed that Walton County has the newest and shiniest automobile fleet with more gadgets than you can shake a stick at? Why does every Code Enforcement vehicle need a fancy looking brush guard and winch on the front? Why does the Mosquito Control Commissioner have a salary of $120,000? etc. Why do they spend all of that money, but we still don't have a public park facility which includes a swimming pool and tennis court? Why not spend something on the people of the County instead of spending it solely on the Gov't? I'm not against spending, but I am against unbridled spending.

 

[SHELLY]

Why are you against choice? Let me be able to make mine. Just give me the freedom to do it.

I'm not against choice....I have a choice to vote yes or no--so do you.

POST 2001!


.

 

[SHELLY]

So I ask, SHELLY, if you like your comfy SOH cap, great, who can blame you? But why is it good for the state as a whole? What is the solution, aside from going back in time?

I'll tell you what the solution ISN'T....it isn't a 12th-hour quick decision to "just do something" so Sorry Charlie can tick it off his list of campaign promises like he did with the Insurance and Tax "promises."

Florida is in some serious economic do-do; it's going to take years to unwind from this housing boom mess. Right now Chuck and his cabal of Idiots are just throwing crap at the wall to see if anything sticks. I'm voting "No" to this silly Super Homestead--I don't want my fingerprints on that trainwreck.

The best we can hope for is that Charlie gets caught playing Footsie in the men's restroom at the Tampa Bay Airport and we can start all over again.

.

 

[Curtis]

The best we can hope for is that Charlie gets caught playing Footsie in the men's restroom at the Tampa Bay Airport and we can start all over again.

 

[waltondude]

Also, anyone notice that the default setting on these calculators for yearly projected increase in property value is about 7 percent? That's for almost every county's Super Homestead Calculator. If you changed it to, say, more like 4-5 percent, over a 20 year period you'd have a much different result. Given the major correcting that is still ongoing, 4-5 percent over the next 20 MAY be more realistic.

Another thing to consider though is that under the Super Exemption, county appraisers would still have too much wiggle room in what they could assess a property for. At present most counties follow the unwritten rule of appraising values at about 80 percent of market value. But that is no where in the law as far as I know. If Super Exemption did pass, what is to stop appraisers from adjusting to using true "market value" numbers so that governments could continue to rake it in?

Think your appraiser is going to be honest? Most of them probably are, but there is the case of Jim Smith in Pinellas County, who is in a ton of hot water now for ethical violations that are clearly a big, big problem.

So the SOH sucks. The Super Exemption sucks. What the heck should we do now? SHELLY is right; I see only backpedaling, not leadership, from good old Charlie.

Assess at 80%? Get with the times. That is so history. The Florida DOR tightened all of that up years ago. Now they have to run so much statistical information to get those rolls up to 95% or they will not be certified. Remember this is how the State funds education. Take from the counties like us that are value rich and give to those that are value poor. I think it was Dempsey Barron that helped put this program together years ago.

Is SOH fair? No way. Just take a look at what the elected officials are paying, www.waltontaxpayers.org, to see how they are benefitting from SOH. And too also see why millage drops mean so little to them.

But rather CC is doing a good job or not is irrelevant. We now have a chance to further limit government. Voting yes on Jan 29th will force planning for the future. Not wild spending on unnecessary items simply because we have the money.

BTW, if you ever get a chance to hear Patrick Pilcher explain how values are determined, it is something worth hearing. Yes values have dropped in 2007, but those formulas do not come into play until someone actually sells their property. Maybe there will be enough foreclosures by the end of the year to drive values down next time.